FINAL RESEARCH PROJECT GUIDELINES - 2021 Erasmus Mundus Master's in Public Policy (Mundus MAPP) - Institut ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
FINAL RESEARCH PROJECT
GUIDELINES
2021
Erasmus Mundus Master’s in Public Policy (Mundus MAPP)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. General Indications (from The 2019-2021 Students’ Guide) ........................................3
II. Specific Indications For IBEI Students ..........................................................................4
i. Aims of the dissertation ..........................................................................................4
ii. Format/Style ...........................................................................................................4
iii. Submission .............................................................................................................7
iv. Assessment: additional marking Criteria ................................................................7
III. References .................................................................................................................7
i. Books ......................................................................................................................8
ii. Articles in Academic Journals ................................................................................8
iii. Daily Journal and Magazine Articles ......................................................................8
iv. Book chapters .........................................................................................................8
v. Internet sources ......................................................................................................8
vi. Footnotes and Citations .........................................................................................8
IV. Plagiarism and Multiple Use of Coursework ..............................................................9
V. Final Research Project ............................................................................................ 10
Cover page template ...................................................................................................... 10
Signature page ............................................................................................................... 11
VI. IBEI's Grading Scale ............................................................................................... 12
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 2
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)
I. GENERAL INDICATIONS (from The 2019-2021 Students’ Guide)
Thesis (20 ECTS)
Building on the thesis report, students continue their project in year two and submit a
thesis at the end of the academic year. The thesis is individually supervised; is supported
by the workshop that is assessed through an oral presentation; and is designed to assess
more advanced skills of independent research.
The thesis is a 12,000 word long paper (including all references, footnotes, bibliography,
appendices, and abstract) with all the attributes of scholarly work presented in
accordance with lBEI or York thesis guidelines (depending on student track). If a
significant change in the topic occurs in the course of the work (as compared to the thesis
report), the student needs to secure approval from both supervisors. If the changed topic
falls outside the expertise of the original supervisors it will not be approved.
Students will be supported throughout the process of undertaking their thesis by
supervisors from their year 1 and year 2 institutions. Both supervisors will be involved in
shaping the thesis report, with communication between supervisors occurring in advance
to ensure that there is broad coherency.
The thesis is due by July 8. In order to complete the thesis requirement, students also
need to pass an oral final examination (defense). The defense will take place during the
first half of September (Week of September 13, 2021) and provide the opportunity to
students to summarize their core argument, and for members of the defense committee
to ask questions, thereby testing student’s oral presentation and argumentation skills.
The defense is graded with Pass or Fail only, which will be communicated to the student
on the day of the defense.
The thesis will be jointly examined by the two institutions the student studies in with their
chosen mobility track and jointly graded by the two supervisors each contributing half the
final grade.
Students receive detailed comments from the graders, and a single grade allocated In
the York/IBEI grading schema. A passing grade is required both in the oral defense and
for the thesis itself for fulfilling the thesis requirement as a whole.
The thesis will be marked in the York/IBEI marking system, using the following
assessment criteria:
● Problem specification: Is the research question well-specified in the abstract and
introduction? Does the thesis provide a convincing rationale for the project
undertaken? Do the abstract and introduction effectively outline the candidates
position in response to the question (e.g. in a thesis statement) and the main
concepts and evidence that will be used to support the argument?
● Argument, Structure and Level of Analysis: Does the thesis develop a clear
argument? How clearly is the argument expressed? Does the structure of the thesis
allow the argument to be developed effectively? Is the conclusion convincing and
well supported by the analysis?
● Analytical Content: Is the theoretical and/or empirical material used accurate (or does
it contain errors or mistakes in factor interpretation)? Does the thesis make good use
of appropriate evidence to answer the research question? How strong and relevant
is the analysis? How well does the student Interpret theory and/or data and use his
or her analysis to answer the research question, and to present his or her own
evaluation of the matter at hand?
● Research design and methods: Does the thesis have an appropriate research
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 3
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)design, including, where appropriate, hypotheses and case study selection? Are the
chosen research method/s well justified?
● Presentation and referencing: Is the report neatly presented and clearly structured?
Is the language clear and correct? Is the report within (and not significantly shorter
than) the expected 12,000 words? Is the use of literature and sources competent? Is
referencing in line with good scholarly standards?
For students whose mobility track involves CEU the electronic version of the entire thesis
must also be uploaded Into the CEU Electronic Thesis Database (ETD). Upon
submission, students will be asked to accept the terms of the ETD Electronic License
Agreement.
II. SPECIFIC INDICATIONS FOR IBEI STUDENTS
i. Aims of the dissertation
The main goal of the dissertation is to carry out independent research on a topic related
to international affairs. This implies an effort to develop an original analysis of a political,
economic, social or cultural issue. More precisely, the Master’s thesis is aimed at:
● Allowing students to deepen their knowledge of a particular issue of their
interest within the area of international affairs.
● Promoting students’ familiarity with the research process.
● Enhancing students’ capabilities to use different research methods, both
qualitative and quantitative.
● Helping students set out a coherent and focused argument.
● Enhancing students’ skills to search and review relevant literature.
ii. Format/Style
a) General aspects and parts of the dissertation
The final project must include a well-defined research question, together with the
justification of its relevance. In addition, students must demonstrate an awareness of
existing research in their chosen area (the ‘literature’) and by surveying it draw
reasonable expectations about likely answers to their question (i.e. hypotheses). Care
should be taken to justify the methods used, and the final project should aim to be an
outstanding contribution to a scientific debate or theoretical discussion, in terms of
originality, systematization or reflection.
Typically, each year at IBEI, dissertations are submitted utilising a wide range of
theoretical approaches. What is common to all are the principles taught in the Advanced
Social Research Methods class regarding the centrality of developing a problem
statement and a research question, the need to think through and formulate expected
answers to the question, the role of concepts and theories in this process, and moving
from concepts to empirical research. While many of you will base your research on
empirical observations about the world to support your arguments, a number of you will
adopt the assumptions of critical theory, post structuralism, ‘thick’ constructivism or
interpretive scholarship drawing on sociology, history, philosophy or political theory.
These approaches to understanding the world are non-positivist (specifically seeking
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 4
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)hermeneutic understanding or the application of post-positivist theory) and often find it awkward to use terminology such as ‘hypothesis’ and ‘independent and dependent variables’, although this does not imply that they do not conduct research using similar ideas regarding questions, expectations (hypotheses) or key concepts (variables). If in doubt, consult your supervisor about how to frame your methodological presentation. With regard to using alternative theoretical approaches that span the positivist – non- positivist gap, this is perfectly acceptable provided you demonstrate awareness of the different epistemological and ontological assumptions underpinning them. Where relevant, students should gather and present original data and information or rely on data published in primary sources. In addition to primary sources, and where such are not available, students can draw on empirical data provided in the secondary literature (e.g. the World Bank or IMF statistical data, the Eurobarometer surveys, etc). Qualitative and quantitative research is equally acceptable and there is no obligation to use one or the other approach. Dissertations are assessed on the basis of how well they answer the question and justify the theoretical framework used and methods chosen. Since the assessment of the dissertation stands or falls on its quality (not the amount of time or the effort devoted by students), its structure is crucial. Although each dissertation needs to be presented in a unique and appropriate manner, the following sections should always be included in your dissertation. - Abstract (in English): this part should be included after the “signature page” of your dissertation and its length should not exceed 250 words. The abstract should provide a synthesis of your dissertation, detailing its main arguments(s) and conclusions. - Contents: this should be included right after the abstract and should detail the different parts, chapters and sections of the dissertation. The usual structure includes the following chapters: Introduction (including the problem statement and research question, aims of the paper and an outline of its structure); Literature review (providing the theoretical framework, identification of hypotheses); Methodology; Empirical discussion; and Conclusion. Page numbers need to be indicated for each chapter and section. - More specifically about the introduction: What is the nature of the puzzle you have chosen to explore? In essence, it will be to learn something about the world. It may be about explaining why something happens, or understanding how various factors interact to bring about certain outcomes. There can also be an element of surprise in a puzzle – something that one would expect to happen, not happening, or the emergence of an unexpected outcome. These may be rooted in longer processes or series of events, and deviation from normalcy is the subject under investigation. What reasons are there to devote time to studying the problem outlined? The justification should identify why the investigation is worth doing. One common reason is that there is a gap in the literature, i.e. that a particular case, or the application of a theory to a given issue, has not been done before. Further value can be added if the new work can demonstrate weaknesses in previous scholars’ work. Justifications can also take the form of ‘exploratory work’, i.e. under-researched areas where a dissertation can provide new insight and suggest new avenues for research. - More specifically about the literature review: Firstly, it provides an overview of existing research that you think is relevant to help answer your question(s). It establishes what work has already been done, what are the core debates in the subject of your dissertation, which theoretical approaches are preferred, and what are the arguments for and against their use. They can also identify independent and intervening variables where necessary. It must be long enough to show that you have careful Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 5 Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)
consulted relevant work, but not so long that it steals space from you making your own
argument. Secondly, it generates expectations about what you are likely to find out.
Commonly we refer to these as the hypotheses – causal statements about the
relationship between identified variables, although some non-positivist scholarship
avoids these terms. If in doubt, your supervisor can help you on these issues.
- More specifically about the conclusion: this part should highlight the main insights and
implications of the dissertation, as well as some indications for further research. In so
doing, it must clearly state all sources of remaining uncertainty in the results. Note that
this part needs to be consistent with the previous content of the manuscript.
- References: the dissertation should contain an alphabetical list of references at the end.
This list needs to be consistent with the reference model used throughout the manuscript.
Remember that it is often better to list a few cutting-edge, relevant, and carefully-read
works than providing extensive lists of mediocre, indirectly relevant, and glossed-over
titles.
In addition to these sections, students may also include one or several appendices and
an index of maps, charts and figures.
Please note that students should discuss the structure of their dissertation with their
supervisor and get their approval before submitting their final manuscripts.
b) Language and length
The dissertation can be submitted in English. All dissertations need to include an abstract
with a maximum length of 250 words.
The dissertation should not exceed 12,000 words in length, including headings and
footnotes, acknowledgements and references, and a word count must be provided on
the “signature page”. Dissertations that are below or over the indicated length may be
penalized. Annexes are not included in the word count, provided that they are relevant
and necessary to the presentation of the project. It is at the discretion of dissertation
examiners to decide whether annexes fulfil the criteria of ‘relevant and necessary’ and in
cases when they are deemed superfluous, a penalty for exceeding the stated word limit
may be incurred.
c) Formal aspects
Dissertations should be type-written in either Times New Roman or Book Antiqua style
using a font size 12, 1.5 line spacing and with 2.5 cm. upper, right, left and lower margins.
Dissertations should also be printed double- or single-sided on A4 paper. Notes need to
be included at the bottom of the corresponding page (footnotes). Printed copies of the
dissertation need to be bound using spiral binding with plastic covers.
As for pagination, the page number can be positioned at the bottom right, centre or left
of the page. The placement of page numbers in the preliminary pages and the main body
of the manuscript must be consistent throughout the dissertation.
1. Do not count or number the title page and the signature page.
2. Number preliminary pages (table of contents, a dedication, a list of figures, tables,
symbols, illustrations, or photographs, a preface and acknowledgments) using
lower case Roman numerals beginning with the number “i” and continue in
sequence to the end of the preliminary pages (i, ii, iii, iv, v, etc.).
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 6
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)3. Number the page including the dissertation’s abstract with the number “1” and
continue in sequence (1, 2, 3, etc.).
iii. Submission
Submission for the Master’s dissertation consists of an electronic version. Emails must
be sent by 8July 2021.
The electronic copy of the dissertation needs to be sent (either in “.pdf” or “.doc”
format) to both first-year and second-year supervisors and the following e-mail
address: mmapp@ibei.org
iv. Assessment: additional marking Criteria
The marking criteria included at the end of this document provide an indication of the
decision-making process which underpins the marking schemes used by the Institut
Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI).
It is not possible to use homogenous assessment criteria for all dissertations submitted,
given their diversity. There may be different requirements for different types of essay or
project work, and for the different disciplines represented within IBEI (e.g. economics,
politics, security studies, International Relations, etc.). However, the set of marking
criteria gives a good idea of the standards IBEI aims to apply across the board.
Students should also note that members of the evaluation committee will pay special
attention to the following aspects:
● Clarity and concision of expression
● Coherence and balance in the organization of the dissertation
● Correct and consistent presentation of references
● Conforming with the formal requirements (length, format, pagination, etc.)
described in these guidelines
● Relevance of the chosen topic and its justification
● Clarity of the research question and/or dissertation goals
● Quality of the literature survey
● Adequacy of the chosen methodology
● Thoroughness of the analysis
● Critical appraisal and originality
● Proper identification of research shortcomings and adequate discussion of
further research
III. REFERENCES
There exist several models to present bibliographic references in dissertations. One of
the most popular ones is the one described in The Chicago Manual of Style, a copy of
which can be found in the UPF library. This is not, however, the only existing manual.
Students can freely choose the model they want to follow in their dissertations, but they
should pay attention to two basic criteria: 1) inclusiveness: references need to provide
all relevant information (author/s name/s and last name/s, work title, year of publication,
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 7
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)location and date of publication, edition, volume, etc.); and 2) consistency: students
should use the same model for referencing throughout the whole dissertation.
The following examples follow the indications of The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th
edition, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.
i. Books
a) Single author:
Bull, Hedley. 1977. The anarchical society. New York: Columbia University Press.
b) Several authors (please note the change between the first and the second author):
Couloumbis, T.A. and J. Wolfe. 1996. Introduction to International Relations. Power
and Justice. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 5th ed.
ii. Articles in Academic Journals
Giardina, A. 2001. The international recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
in the country of origin. Rivista de Diritto internazionale privato e processuale
18 (2): 265-278.
iii. Daily Journal and Magazine Articles
a) Known author:
Kelley, Kitty. 2005. Bush’s Veil Over History. The New York Times, October 10, op-
ed. contributors.
b) Unknown author:
Le Monde. 2005. Séisme au Pakistan: le bilan dépasse 30 000 morts, les sinistrés
reçoivent aide et secours. October 10, International.
iv. Book chapters
Kegley, Ch.W and G.A. Raymond. 1995. Great-Power Relations: Paths to Peace
in the Twenty First Century. In Ch. W. Kegley and E.R. Wittkpof. The global
agenda. Issues and perspectives, pp.154-169. New York: McGraw-Hill.
v. Internet sources
Suzuki, Hideyuki. 2005. Distributor's margins and GDP. Economic and Social
Research Institute, Government of Japan. ESRI Discussion Paper 131.
http://www.esri.go.jp/en/archive/e_dis/abstract/e_dis131-e.htmlUH (last access:
October 5, 2005).
Students are encouraged to check one of the following manuals for further information:
Gibaldi, Joseph. 2003. MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, 6th
edition.New York: Modern Language Association of America.
The Chicago Manual of Style. 2003. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 15 th
edition.
vi. Footnotes and Citations
a) Footnotes
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 8
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)When an argument is attributed to a source, the source should appear in the footnotes.
When a specific rather than the general argument of a work is referenced, the pages of
the work where the argument is made should be provided as well.
b) Citations
When a citation from a source is included in the thesis text, the footnote reference should
indicate the page from which the citation comes.
“The starting point of international relations is the existence of states”
fn: Bull, Hedley. 1977. The anarchical society. New York: Columbia University Press, p.
8, emphasis in original.
IV. PLAGIARISM AND MULTIPLE USE OF COURSEWORK
Plagiarism (or submitting material that in part or whole is not entirely one’s own work) is
strictly prohibited, as is the multiple use of coursework for different degree programmes,
with the exception of cases where an IBEI dissertation fails and is revised and
resubmitted the following year.
Members of the IBEI community have an obligation to bring misconduct to the attention
of both the Masters’ Coordinator and the Director of the Institute. In the case of plagiarism
or multiple use of coursework, misconduct proceedings will be confidential, impartial,
transparent and urgent.
In the event of an accusation of plagiarism proceedings will begin when a member of the
IBEI community reports the event in question, and they will conclude with student
notification of the decision of the hearing committee.
Except where the programme of studies indicates otherwise, the procedure will follow
these three steps:
Step 1: a case of misconduct is to be reported to both the Coordinator and Director
of the programme. The member of the community who observes a case of plagiarism
or multiple use of coursework must notify IBEI with all due haste. If considered
appropriate, the student in question will also be notified. The Masters’ Coordinator
will inform the student that misconduct proceedings have been initiated and will take
whatever measures are necessary to guarantee the confidentiality of such
proceedings.
Step 2: the presentation a defense by the student. The student will have three
calendar days to file written arguments and any supporting materials considered
suitable. These documents must be submitted to the Director and the Coordinator
of the Master’s programme. They, together with the faculty member concerned, will
determine the appropriate sanctions to impose. If applicable, they will prevent the
student from sitting the examination session of the course in question.
The next step will only be taken in cases where the student opposes the accusation
of plagiarism, multiple use of coursework or the sanctions imposed in Step 2.
Step 3: a hearing committee will be convened. Within five calendar days from the
initiation of proceedings, the Director will convene the hearing committee, having
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 9
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)previously notified IBEI’s Scientific Council. The hearing committee will be made up
of at least three members and it will decide on the case. The hearing committee
must hear the allegations of the faculty member concerned if the faculty member
requests being heard. The hearing committee is also to notify the student of its
decision through the Director or Coordinator of the programme within a period of two
calendar days from the hearing date.
V. FINAL RESEARCH PROJECT
Cover page template
Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals
Academic Year XXXX – XXXX
DISSERTATION’S TITLE
Dissertation’s subtitle
Dissertation submitted by
STUDENT’S NAME AND LAST NAME
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
ERASMUS MUNDUS MASTER’S PROGRAMME IN PUBLIC POLICY
(MMAPP)
SUPERVISOR: Supervisor’s name and last name
Location, Date (Month, year)
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 10
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)Signature page
Author’s name and surname(s): _____________________________________________
DNI or passport number: ________________________________________________
As the author and sole copyright holder over an original piece of work, a final master
thesis,
on (specify topic) _________________________________________,
entitled ___________________________________________
I hereby certify that this dissertation contains no material which has been accepted
for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution
and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or
written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text.
I hereby authorize IBEI to include the aforementioned piece of work in the website or in
other IBEI’s communications media, or others in which IBEI participates, within the scope
of its normal, non-profit activities, including other IBEI digital platforms, or in which IBEI
participates, of free access via Internet.
I therefore authorize IBEI to take such measures as may be necessary for the purposes of
adding the piece of work in question to the media referred to above, preserving it and
providing public access thereto. IBEI shall not be required to reproduce the piece of work
in its original formats or resolutions. The rights that IBEI require to undertake all the
aforementioned measures are granted to them indefinitely, universally, free-of charge, and
non-exclusively; I am therefore free to publish the piece of work anywhere else.
I hereby declare that neither my signature of this authorization nor the content of the piece
of work places me in breach of any rights held by third parties in relation to intellectual
property, industrial property, commercial secrecy or any other matter. I therefore exempt
IBEI from any obligation or liability corresponding to any legal action to which the deposited
piece of work may give rise.
Lastly, I consent to my piece of work being made available under an “Attribution-
NonCommercial- NoDerivs 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ”
Creative Commons license, in accordance with which it may be copied, distributed and
transmitted as long as its original author and institution are cited and it is not used for
commercial purposes or as the basis for derivative work.
Signature
Place and date
Word count: XXXXX
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 11
Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)VI. IBEI'S GRADING SCALE The following marking criteria are designed to give you an indication of the decision - making process which underpins the marking schemes used by the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals (IBEI). Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 12 Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)
Mark Range Key features applicable in the assessment of examination essays and dissertations
Outstanding answer: exceptionally well structured and theoretically informed, showing striking personal insight and originality.
Overall
Authoritative; full understanding of relevant material; highly original analysis; highly independent and critical judgment; high
9-10 Understanding
degree of precision.
Unusually extensive range of sources, applied with outstanding insight; exceptionally effective use of evidence to support
Selection & Coverage
argument.
Structure Excellent structure, focus, presentation and writing style, contributing to a highly compelling argument.
Overall Highly thoughtful answer informed by wider reading, showing clarity of thought, personal insight and originality.
8-9 Understanding Thorough understanding of relevant material; insightful discussion; evidence of independent and critical judgment.
Selection & Coverage Extensive range of sources applied insightfully; very effective use of evidence to support argument.
Structure Very good structure and focus; clear and fluent writing style; compelling argument.
Overall Thoughtful answer informed by wider reading, showing clarity of thought and personal insight.
7-8
Understanding Thorough understanding of relevant material; insightful discussion and analysis.
Selection & Coverage Extensive range of sources applied insightfully. Effective use of evidence to support argument
Structure Well-structured and focused; clear and fluent writing style; persuasive argument.
Overall Good understanding or relevant material; coherent and logical argument.
6-7
Understanding Good understanding of important facts and concepts; substantive analysis of key issues.
Selection & Coverage Good use of relevant sources/literature; employment of a range of evidence to support argument.
Structure Coherent and logical presentation.
Overall Sound understanding; limited analysis.
5-6 Understanding Generally sound understanding of relevant material but limited range or depth; more descriptive that analytical.
Selection & Coverage Appropriate but limited use of sources/literature; attempts to support argument, but these are awkward and/or unconvincing.
Structure Generally clear presentation but awkward structure and/or limited development of argument.
Overall Basic understanding and analysis.
4-5
Understanding Some general knowledge but little detail; minimal demonstration of analytical thought.
Selection & Coverage Sparse coverage of basic material; generally unsuccessful in using evidence to support argument.
Structure Adequate structure and presentation, but unclear or disorganized in places.
Overall Unsystematic, incomplete and/or inaccurate.
Understanding Little or no knowledge demonstrated; numerous inaccuracies; meaning unclear; little or no analysis.
0-3
Selection & Coverage Inappropriate and/or inaccurate use of sources/literature; poor or no use of evidence to support argument.
Disorganised and unclear presentation; consistently poor spelling and grammar; incoherent argument or none discernible;
Structure
unacceptably brief.
Final Research Project Guidelines 2021 13Erasmus Mundus Master’s Programme in Public Policy (MMAPP)You can also read
